is this camera reasonably good in low light?
19797
Compared to a camera phone, yes. It also seemed to be better than a friends canon. There are multiple low-light presets
19798
It can be, but not with the kit lens. You'll need a faster lens like the 50mm f/1.8.
19799
Reasonably good. Yes it is. I guess Pentax as a brand suffers in the lens department. Cameras are good. For lenses you have very limited options.
19800
It has performed very well for me in low light situations. I have been startled a few times by the brightness of the recorded image. I usually use a Pentax 18-250mm lens.
19801
The K-50 has much better low light sensitivity than most other entry level DSLRs. The K-50's sensor is, for its mega pixels, very large. Larger sensor=larger pixels on sensor=more light hitting individual pixels. You can find plenty of side by side comparisons online between the K-50 and other cameras, but the short of it is that the K-50 beats almost every other camera in it's category for low light sensitivity.EDIT: Also, shooting in RAW mode is very important. RAW images allow you much greater flexibility in post-processing with programs such as Adobe Lightroom by having a greater amount of information per pixel than a JPG format image. The K-50 has much better low light sensitivity than most other entry level DSLRs. The K-50's sensor is, for its mega pixels, very large. Larger sensor=larger pixels on sensor=more light hitting individual pixels. You can find plenty of side by side comparisons online between the K-50 and other cameras, but the short of it is that the K-50 beats almost every other camera in it's category for low light sensitivity.EDIT: Also, shooting in RAW mode is very important. RAW images allow you much greater flexibility in post-processing with programs such as Adobe Lightroom by having a... » Read More The K-50 has much better low light sensitivity than most other entry level DSLRs. The K-50's sensor is, for its mega pixels, very large. Larger sensor=larger pixels on sensor=more light hitting individual pixels. You can find plenty of side by side comparisons online between the K-50 and other cameras, but the short of it is that the K-50 beats almost every other camera in it's category for low light sensitivity.EDIT: Also, shooting in RAW mode is very important. RAW images allow you much greater flexibility in post-processing with programs such as Adobe Lightroom by having a greater amount of information per pixel than a JPG format image. « Show Less
19802
I found it to be very good in low light, I used it all the time while shooting in the dark low light environment of the northern California redwood forests. The shots came out very good, but I always shot in Raw, might have something to do with it.
1957127
No. Although the camera is very capable at low lights, its capability is limited to slow moving subjects because the camera's sutter speed slows down to compensate with low lights.
15209
The low light performance is the best I've seen in this price range. I've noticed that in low light conditions that the auto focus can sometimes cause a few out of focus moments like when somebody walks through the shot slowly. I take videos of bands in dimly lit bars and they usually come out fairly good. If low light is critical, try doing a search for reviews on more expensive cameras.
2228813
No this camera do not work well in low light. If you need it to make good pictures it wont work for you. I bought this tablet about a month and is fast for what I use it, mail, read books, videos. I recommend it but not for the cameras.
2086679
It takes decent pictures w/o flash but not in super low lighting conditions.
671656
This camera is great in low light if you use the flash. Without the flash the photo will come out a little dark. Trust me; you'll love this camera :)
1399456
I'm not a camera buff and don't understand the question. If the question is how does it do in low-light conditions without the flash - then, not very good.
1290793
I have not used it in a really low light situation yet. I have taken pictures in the shade and the clarity is excellent. I used the "Automatic" selection on the camera and I've been happy with the ones taken in the shade.
943784
Seems to handle low light shooting (Especially with high ISO) very well: http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2012/10/09/night-time-street-shooting-with-the-sony-rx1-amazing-high-iso-samples/
648160
Honestly, I'm not sure. I never tried to film in low light and my low light photos were not particularly impressive. As an aside, I want to let you know that I don't think this camera is worth your money, that is if you want a durable, working camera. After only one year of light usage of this camera, while on a trip to the Grand Canyon, the camera inexplicably began to produce super overexposed photos. After that happened, I fiddled around with the camera and adjusted it according to the instruction manual, but I couldn't fix the issue. Eventually, I came back to the Amazon and searched for the product's negative reviews and sure enough, others had similar issues that made this camera not usable after a few months to a year. According to those reviewers, when they reached out to Fuji to inquire about getting replacement parts or their cameras fixed, Fuji was either completely not helpful or offered very costly help. You may want to check out those negative reviews for yourself.
1146247
Hi there. I haven't checked the quality of the video with low light, if that is what you are asking.
1143738
low light recording is good as long as you do not zoom. The bigger the aperture of the lens the better quality of the picture
1771280
It does well in low light, and its macro is good. It also adjusts focus and brightness automatically. Its not as fast as a dedicated video camera, but it does the job well. The built in stereo microphone is also very good. I hope that helps
2137224
I haven't used this camera in a while, but from what I remembered it handled it self pretty well in low light conditions. It depends a lot on the light that is available. I am assuming you're looking to rent the camera because of it's size, but if size is not an issue, there are probably better DSLR's out there that handle low light conditions better in terms of speed and ISO performance. But, for its size the Ricoh does a really good job in low light conditions.
1608677
Maybe it is good in low light because for the same reason it is no sharper than a cheap 5 MP camera: all the light is concentrated on a smaller CCD. Maybe it is really no better than other new cameras i low light. I have always been happy with simple sony and samsung cameras. Cameras are one of the devices you really have to test side-by-side in the store to know.
452766
fair to poor - you are only going to get so much with bad lighting. it is a great camera over all for the money. You need to buy pro camera's for night and dim lighting work.
2281893
it doesn't do well in low-light settings but it does do great when there's adequate lighting.